About your Search

20120929
20120929
STATION
CNN 8
CNNW 7
FBC 3
KNTV (NBC) 2
KQED (PBS) 2
MSNBC 2
MSNBCW 2
WETA 2
CSPAN 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WRC (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 50
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 50 (some duplicates have been removed)
for a full accounting of the benghazi terrorist attacks and the events in yemen and egypt. the white house continues to give every appearance of stone walling, both the congress and the press. almost three weeks have passed since those attacks, and leaked from within the white house, an intelligence community suggests the obama administration has been involved in an outright cover up. there are reports tonight that officials within the administration were concerned from the very beginning about the message the white house chose to push after the attack. the attack that was spontaneous they said, and not at all the work of terrorists. here's white house spokesman jay carney back on the 14th of september. >> the incident in benghazi, as well as elsewhere, but these are all being investigated, what i'm saying is that we have no evidence at this time to suggest otherwise, that there was a preplanned or alterior investigation behind the unrest. my point was that we don't have and did not have concrete evidence to suggest that this was not in reaction to the film. lou: he's referring to the almo
clinton suggested that the consulate attack in benghazi involved the al-qaeda affiliate in north africa it was like will goly the work of the terrorist group. that admission led to many questions what took the administration so long with john mccain and lindsay graham issuing this statement. we recognize that al-qaeda involvement in the terrorist attack that killed four americans is an inconvenient truth for a president that claims to be destroying al-qaeda. but it's not too much to ask why the administration has taken so long to state what appeared obvious on what really happened on september 11th, 2012. we're a back with our panel. so given all that we've learned in the last couple of weeks. how big a security failure was that attack on the consulate? >> it was far bigger than this administration is willing to admit. we knew the security situation in benghazi was getting out of control. there were attack on the british consulate which was closed and there with a attacks on convoy and attacks on the u.s. consulate, too. there were reports out of benghazi. u.s. issued a statement in aug
this administration is willing to admit. we knew the security situation in benghazi was getting out of control. there were attack on the british consulate which was closed and there with a attacks on convoy and attacks on the u.s. consulate, too. there were reports out of benghazi. u.s. issued a statement in august warning americans not to travel there, telling them there is probably bombings and a assassinations. >> paul: we also know that they called for the revenge against the united states for a killing by a terrorist by a drone attack. they had ample warning. did they fall down on the job? >> it seems like there were a number of cascade go failures. it's fair to say it was probably a serious mistake for the ambassador stevens to go to benghazi. it was a serious mistake for them to have a marine detachment at our facility in benghazi. i'll say this for stevens. he was a brave guy. he was involved in a transition and wanted to be involved in the transition for building a new libya. you have to take some kind of risks like that. >> there is no question about that. but people knew that libya
. >> rick: when governor romney delivered his initial response after the attack in benghazi he was ganged you. they coordinated their questions in the press conference. after the 60 minutes interview, nothing. >> a few words from governor romney i bet he wishes he could take back and bumps comment went by unnoticed. which takes me back to another occasion where another u.s. president used a awkward and that was president reagan in the wake of beirut bombing when all the marines were killed. president made some statement, it takes time to fix your kitchen. it was an awkward statement just like president obama wasn't minimizing it but it was a week's news how president reagan is out of it. big news this whole thing, mohammed morsi saying it's unacceptable, instead of siding but that is bump in the road. >> rick: collective outrage on the part of media? >> selective outrage. zero outrage of so many things that are outrageous. i guess most of outrage we've seen is this video that the administration elevated to a movie. it's not a movie. it's a youtube video that nobody ever saw. they are buyi
investigators still have not set foot in the ruins of the american consulate in benghazi, libya, tonight we're the first to tell you why. tonight, we have the likely reason and we have it from a top law enforcement official. four americans as you know were murdered in the assault, one american ambassador, christopher stevens. that was two and a half weeks ago. two and a half weeks that have seen the administration first describe this as a spontaneous outburst even though our reporting revealed that officials knew within 24 hours that it was not. only much later did they back away from that assessment. today, the director of national intelligence, james clapper, put out a statement explaining that early evidence supported that theory so that's why they told the white house and congress. clapper says that throughout the investigation, his agency made it clear that the assessment was preliminary and could change. neither his statement nor our sources specify a time frame for the dni's change of view. again, our sources tell us that law enforcement officials knew within 24 hours that this was a
in the ruins of the american consulate of benghazi, libya. tonight, we're the first it tell you why. the likely reason and from a top law enforcement official. four americans as you know were murdered in the assault, one american ambassador, christopher stevens, that was 2 1/2 weeks ago, 2 1/2 weeks, that saw the administration describe this first as a spontaneous outburst, even though reporting shows that officials knew within 24 hours it was not. today the director of national intelligence, james clapper, explained early evidence supported that theory, so that's why they told the white house and congress. clapper says throughout the investigation, his agency made it clear that the assessment was preliminary and could change. neither his statement nor our source have a time frame. law enforcement officials knew within 24 hours this was a terror attack. reporting reveals that even though the administration says the investigation is going smoothing, the fbi has hit a bump in the road. a senior law enforcement official, telling fran townsend, the fbi wanted the u.s. military to provide perimeter
test te what happened more than two weeks after that deadly attack on americans in benghazi. the unanswered questions that are not going away. and the new demand for answers. >>> hitting home, a stark reminder today of the struggle so many americans are facing, even if they have a job. >>> where is jimmy hoffa, an enduring american mystery, tonight, why they're digging into t evidence. >>> and an extraordinary suggestion from the head of apple. >>> and making a difference, under the friday night lights, something everybody can hear about. nightly news begins now. >>> good evening, i'm savannah guthrie, in tonight for brian. it has been more than two weeks since the u.s. ambassador to libya and three other americans were killed at the u.s. consulate in benghazi. tonight, a rare reversal, tonight, the intelligence officials say they originally got it wrong. patience is slow with the investigation, and shifting explanations from the administration. tonight, members of congress from both parties are demanding answers, and on the ground in libya, the american officials sent to pi
to provide perimeter support in benghazi, protection, in other words, but that request was not granted. fran's a former white house homeland security advisor. she served in the george w. bush administration, currently she sits on the cia external advisory panel and recently visited libya with her employer, mcandrews and forbes. also joining us, former fbi assistant director, tom fuentes, who has extensive experience investigating attacks on americans overseas, and former cia officer, bob baer. so fran, so the fbi sought military protection to go into benghazi. why didn't they get it? >> well, the answer to that question, i think, is not really clear. so it's not unusual, when you want to set up a security perimeter, you may look to the host country. if the host country is unable or unwilling to provide it, we don't know what the answer to that is, y may ask if you think you need it for u.s. military support, but that's got to go through a process. it needs state department and nsc support, the u.s. military would have to make an assessment about how big a security package that would entail a
. >> the reason we call it benghazi-gate it contains the grim prospect that the administration knew or should have known. this is the one cancer on the presidency. dare i say that. >> we have been lied to. we flat out have been lied to. everybody with two eyes and i.q. above plant life understands that what happened in egypt and what happened in libya was not some spontaneous reak to a stupid 13-minute video on youtube. richard nixon was forced out of office because he lied. because he covered some stuff up. i will be blunt and tell you this. nobody died in watergate. we have people dead because of this and there are questions to be answered. >> andrea: it's not just republicans concerned about this. just yesterday, senate democrats also started demanding answers from the administration. greg, we're 17 days out since we learned this was a terror attack. even leon panetta said this was a terror attack. but nothing from the commander-in-chief. shouldn't he have been honest the first place? >> greg: this is confusing to me. the response is let's coordinate it, with an engineering major. if he knew it
and benghazi. this story line is continuing. gwen: in part because the explanation is -- >> the white house has been all over the map on this. for several days the white house from the podium, jay carney and administration officials across the board were insistent that the attacks in libya were caused by this video that was on the internet. they finally acknowledged that it actually was an act of terrorism. if congress was in session right now, i think this would be a real potential problem for this administration and the president because there would be hearings and a concerted effort to find out what happened in benghazi. as of now, i'm not sure that that will sort of turn the election probably gause governor romney has been ham-handed how he has reacted to this. but that is one of the wild cards here in this race that the obama administration and the president cannot control. gwen: except that, the upside, he's the guy with the job and hard to unseat an incumbent and the downside, he's the guy with the job? >> you saw romney try to come out early and he did make those comments seeming to sug
from both sides of the aisle. attack in benghazi that left four americans dead, including chris stevens, ambassador to libya. molly henneberg is live in washington. >> molly: the white house and state department are defending ambassador susan rice. a spokesman for barack obama says she has done extraordinary work for the american people. also democratic senator john kerry called rice, quote a remarkable public servant and state department put out a statement defending rice's comments to those sunday shows. the statement said, quote, at every turn, ambassador rice said she was providing the best information and best assessment that the administration had at the time. based on what was provided to ambassador rice and other senator senior intelligence committee but they knew one day of the assault that it was a coordinated terror attack likely tied to al-qaeda. congressman king wants to know why ambassador rice went on tv five days after the attack and said otherwise. >> the entire administration, miss informed the world and she was our representative to the world explaining what happened.
on the consulate in benghazi, peter king becoming the highest ranking lawmaker to call for her to step down. and congressman king making his case moments ago here on fox news channel. >> if ambassador rice was deliberately misleading the american people and showed a lack of knowledge and sophistication, she shouldn't hold that. the entire administration is wrong and this is the american people, and the world, and she was as spokeswoman, our representative to the world and explaining what happened and virtually everything she said was wrong. >> kelly: with that, we welcome you to a brand new hour of america's election headquarters, i'm kelly wright. >> i'm jamie colby, an interesting new twist to the whole story, congressman king joins a growing list of lawmakers, why ambassador rice initially declared the benghazi attack, a reaction to a protests in cairo over an anti-islam film before acknowledging it was a coordinated attack. and christopher stevens and three other americans were killed in the september 11th attack in benghazi and molly henneberg is following the story live in washington
of two weeks now. that is what happened in benghazi? why was the message coming out of the administration so muddled at best and misleading at worse? when did they know that it was a terrorist attack? why won't the president actually use the term terrorist attack? well, yesterday there was a major break through and one agency came out and took responsibility. >> in fact, it was james clapper's office, the director of national intelligent basically trying to take the onus off the white house by saying hey it was the intelligence community's fault and said, this quote: in the immediate aftermath there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day in cairo. we provided that initial assessment to the executive branch officials and members of congress who used that information to discuss the attack publicly and provide updates as they became available. through the our investigation we continued to emphasize that our information was preliminary and evolving. >> we were waiting for someone like james clapper or tom donilin to weigh
a growing list of lawmakers, why ambassador rice initially declared the benghazi attack, a reaction to a protests in cairo over an anti-islam film before acknowledging it was a coordinated attack. and christopher stevens and three other americans were killed in the september 11th attack in benghazi and molly henneberg is following the story live in washington what happens next. >> she has her supporters including the president saying she's done extraordinary work at the united nations and providing the best knowledge that the administration had at the time. and john kerry, democratic chairman of the foreign relations committee says she's a quote enormously capable person, but republican congressman peter king is it not convinced. he wants to know why five days after the attack that killed ambassador chris stevens and three others, ambassador rice stated publicly on several talk shows it was a spontaneous attack that grew out of an anti-muslim video when there was evidence it was a coordinated terror attack. >> ambassador rice should resign and we should investigate how high up this
. now members of congress from both parties are demanding answers. on the ground in benghazi, investigators can't even get to the scene. nbc's mike viqueira is joining us from the white house with more on this. mike, how big a deal is this reversal? >> reporter: well, it's very controversial and potentially a big deal. the question all along is ever since those september 11th attacks what caused them, what was the motivation for the people who killed four americans including the american ambassador. and at the beginning as everybody is well aware at this point, the white house insisted that these were spontaneous demonstrations, a reaction to that anti-islamic film, much like the demonstrations that had happened just hours earlier in cairo and subsequently swept through the muslim world from the middle east to indonesia. they denied that there was any terrorism link involved. from the beginning, republicans and other critics have questioned that. they said that the president and the administration have not wanted to admit a terror link in an election year around 9/11. they sa
later corrected her, saying she was speaking generally, not about the attack in benghazi. now, u.s. intelligence sources tell cnn tonight that in the immediate after math of the attack, they thought the attack might have been, their word, spontaneous. okay, this is going to be a crucial word to define. what exactly is immediate aftermath? because the white house and the state department stuck with the spontaneous version of events for eight days. >> we are very cautious about drawing any conclusions with regard to who the perpetrators were, what their motivations were, whether it was premeditated. >> this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. >> based on the information we had at the time and have to this day, we do not have evidence that it was premeditated. >> all right. these same people apparently knew a terrorist attack was perpetrated by al-qaeda within 24 hours after the attack, so the lack of information sharing does not seem to add up. tonight, representative peter king is calling for the resignation of u.s. ambassador to the u.n. susan rice for what he says was mis
answers. on the ground in benghazi investigators can't even get to the scene. nbc's mike viqueira is joining us from the white house with more. good saturday morning to you. >> good morning. >> how big is this reversal? >> it's a very big deal. from the beginning, alex, ever since those attacks on september 11th in benghazi, libya, that left four americans dead, 9 questions not only have been how could this have happened but did the administration shy away, intentionally mislead the american public about the involvement of terrorists, and in particular elements tied to al qaeda. now there are many republicans who say the administration, including the president, specifically said that this was tied to that anti-islam video that played on youtube that sparked demonstrations, make no mistake, worldwide across the region in muslim countries from the middle east all the way to indonesia. and, in fact, the administration spokesman, the president's spokesman jay carney had said that explicitly in the immediate days afterwards. then the explanations began to shift a little bit. susan rice
the world. she is not milk crow managing what is going on in benghazi, libya. the cia might be at fault as well. they should have known and on and on and on. and you say. >> i say that she was being briefed all the time and if she wasn't being briefed if she was declining her intelligence briefing which has been reported on fox then she is at fault for that, too. they had warning after warning. yesterday's "wall street journal" makes it extremely clear how much warning they had, various aassassination attempts, destruction of property attempts, reports from various intelligence sources. they did nothing to protect the ambassador whatsoever. that's wrong. plus, there was the coverup afterwards. immediately afterwards when it was clear that well-armed, well-organized terrorists had done this attack. the state department and ms. rice at the u.n. were still saying and mr. obama were still saying it was spontaneous uprising even though the killers had automatic antiaircraft cannon in which they were raking the building. that's not the kind of thing a person usually carries in his pocket. >>
for a u.s. ambassador to resign. we have reaction to the new intelligence report that the benghazi attack that killed four americans was an act of terror. >>> abortion, gun policy, the war on drugs. some of these social issues shaping the presidential race. all morning, we put them in focus. >> i can see in his face that there was a lot more to her story than even what she was willing to let on. >>> women hold up half the sky. the message of a new documentary from "new york times" columnist. in an interview exclusive with cnn he sits down with celebrities. >>> saturday, september 29th, i'm deb feyerick. >> good to have you with us this morning. we are starting with the new revelations on the deadly attack in libya. >> the attack that killed chris stevens and three other americans. >> the u.s. intelligence community now says it was a deliberate terrorist assault. cnn intelligence correspondent suzanne kelly has more. >> this is really the fullest account aing yet on behalf of the community which rarely venchers to the public domain to issue what they knew. the intelligence community says t
of national intelligence now says the attack in benghazi was deliberate and organized. some of those involved, he says, were linked to groups affiliated with or sympathetic to al qaeda. it's a big change from the administration's original claim. >> what happened in benghazi was, in fact, initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in cairo. >> reporter: now the republican chairman of the house homeland security committee says ambassador rice should step down. >> either she's intentionally misleading the american people and she should resign for that, or she's unqualified to be u.n. ambassador and she got the facts as wrong as she did and she should resign for that. >> reporter: but the white house's ambassador rice was simply offering the best information available at the time. pete williams, nbc washington. >>> prosecutors say before james holmes went on that deadly shooting rampage in a colorado movie theater, he had been barred from the university of colorado for threatening a professor. court documents are raising questions about why campus police did not rep
, the administration's stance, for example, on what exactly happened in benghazi has recently changed. i wonder how that might impact this debate. >> i would be shocked if there wasn't some questioning from that either from the moderators or at least perhaps some attention drawn to it by mitt romney. this is a huge issue for the president, is his policy working in north africa, in the middle east? what happened there? did the administration tell the truth? if they didn't tell the truth, why didn't they tell the truth? i absolutely expect this to be part of the debate. the idea that the president is somehow not practiced to speak in public or engage in public debate baugs he hasn't had more than a few days in nevada to prepare is a little ridiculous. >> jonathan, with obama's lead widening in the polls, how important are these debates in your view for romney? more specifically, how important is the first debate? >> each of these debates is an opportunity for romney to try to shake up the race. if you look at the polling in pretty much every swing state right now, there are a couple of exceptions, mi
the benghazi attacks. some statements were made by the am bass do to the united nations, susan rice. now, peter king is calling for her to step down. here's what he told our wolf blitzer. >> i believe this was such a failure of foreign policy message and leadership, such a misstatement of facts, as were known at the time and for her to go on all of those shows and in effect be our spokesman for the world and misinform our allies and spokesmen around the world. someone has to pay the price for this. things go wrong and everyone forgets about it the next day. we have to send a clear message on such a vital issue like this where the american ambassador was killed, the presumptioned a to be it's terrorism. can see why they would have said it's too early to definitively rule out it was terrorism. to me, it was a terrible mistake to make whether intentionally or unintentionally, to show the significance, she should resign. >> the white house is standing by rice. they said everything she said in that interview was cleared by int interagency groups based on information they had and certainly nothing wa
, on what exactly happened in benghazi has recently changed. i wonder how that might impact this debate. >> i would be shocked if there wasn't some questioning from that either from the moderators or at least perhaps some attention drawn to it by mitt romney. this is a huge issue for the president, is his policy working in north africa, in the middle east? what happened there? did the administration tell the truth? if they didn't tell the truth, why didn't they tell the truth? i absolutely expect this to be part of the debate. the idea that the president is somehow not practiced to speak in public or engage in public debate baugs he hasn't had more than a few days in nevada to prepare is a little ridiculous. >> jonathan, with obama's lead widening in the polls, how important are these debates in your view for romney? more specifically, how important is the first debate? >> each of these debates is an opportunity for romney to try to shake up the race. if you look at the polling in pretty much every swing state right now, there are a couple of exceptions, missouri being one of them. almo
of the attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. libya attack was organized, u.s. says. this is in this morning's "wall street journal." host: the story is also being covered in the "new york times." the headline, "shifting reports on libya killings may cost obama." host: back to the zpones our discussion regarding one party versus divided government. our next call is from anton in indiana on our line for democrats. anton, you're on the "washington journal." caller: well, thank you for taking my call. i enjoy your show. i watch you every weekend. host: well, i appreciate you watching. now, your thoughts on one party or a divided government, which are you in favor of? caller: well, i believe in divided government, but i don't believe in obstruction of the process. and i would like to remind all of your viewers about the grover norquist pledge that all of the republicans seemed to sign, and it kind of backs them in a corner not to compromise with the democrats. i would also like to remind everyone that mitt romney has also signed this pledge to grover norquist. can you im
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 50 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)